Agenda and minutes

There was a significant public presence at the meeting with verbal statements made and written statements submitted, reflecting the following key points:

 Dr Geoff Walker ~ Site HA11 – east of Burrium Gate) 

Site Positives: The proposed development site is sensibly located on the edge of Usk, close to facilities, and has potential for reasonable road access, making it logical for further development. 

Drainage Concerns: Significant issues with drainage (surface water and foul drainage) need to be resolved before permission can be granted. There is uncertainty about how previous drainage issues have been addressed, and the site’s steep slope increases the risk of surface water runoff and flooding, which has already affected residents. 

Access Issues: Access to the site is problematic. The short stretch of Monmouth Road may not support additional junctions, and access via Burrium Gate is considered highly undesirable for residents. 

Both drainage and access solutions will require considerable expenditure, either from the developer or the County Council. 

The development could proceed if drainage and access issues are fully resolved; otherwise, there is risk to current residents. 

 Gareth Williams - Lichfields: Barrett Redrow Homes and Simon Taber - Ecology Solutions ~ Site HA4, Leasbrook, Monmouth

There is a significant need for affordable housing in Monmouthshire, with the Council identifying a requirement for 148 new affordable homes per year in the Monmouth housing market area. 

The Leasbrook site will provide 270 new homes, including 135 affordable homes, helping families who otherwise could not access the housing ladder. 

Leasbrook is the only strategic housing allocation proposed in Monmouth and represents nearly half of the town’s housing allocation. 

The allocation is central to the LDP strategy, as Monmouth is a primary settlement and must contribute to meeting local needs. 

Delivering new homes in Monmouth is challenging, requiring a balance between urgent housing needs and other considerations. 

Necessary studies have been conducted in line with planning policy and professional standards, showing that Leasbrook can be developed with appropriate mitigation measures. 

Proposed mitigation includes a new 25-metre tree line boundary and sustainable urban drainage systems. 

He confirmed that Simon Taber would address ecology issues. 

Jonty Pearce ~ Site HA4, Leasbrook, Monmouth

Wales is described as one of the most nature-depleted countries, quoting the Future Generations Commissioner. 

Councillors face a stark choice: to destroy or save an environmentally sensitive site. 

The Council and consultants claim limited bat activity, but the Dixton Bat Project recorded the rare greater horseshoe bat 893 times in August alone, averaging 26 recordings per night. 

The site hosts 12 bat species, representing 80% of all bat species found in Wales, which is remarkable and worth saving. 

The Council withheld the 2024 bat survey, which detected only two species and missed the soprano pipistrelle bats from a nearby maternity roost. 

Natural Resources Wales did not agree with the conclusion that there would be no adverse effect on bats. 

The issue should not be wildlife versus affordable housing, as selecting a different site could provide both. 

Proceeding with the current plan risks  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1.

None.

A reminder was given that the Welsh Water site visit for Committee Members would take place on Thursday 2nd October at 1pm.  

In relation to the Action List dated 10th July: Car parking information would be sent to the Committee, a meeting to discuss Osbaston Road being arranged. 

Action Scrutiny: Animal Welfare team/RSPCA to add to the Committee’s Forward Work Programme. 

Noted.

The minutes were confirmed as a true and accurate record.

To scrutinise the content of the Deposit RLDP Consultation Report before Council.

Cabinet Member CouncillorGriffiths introduced the report as follows: 

·        He emphasised the committee’s role in scrutinising whether the consultation report is full and fair, with amendments possible based on scrutiny outcomes.  

·        He stated the plan’s first objective is to make more housing affordable, noting half the county’s population cannot afford open market homes and a third cannot afford “affordable” homes.  

·        He highlighted urgent need for social rented housing, referencing Michelle Morgan’s earlier contribution.  

·        He explained the plan will provide 2,000 homes, with 1,000 affordable and 660 for social rent, requiring 50% affordable housing from landowners.  

·        He noted Monmouthshire is the first in Wales to require 50% affordable housing, with financial plans supporting this.  

·        He discussed demographic challenges: an aging population, declining school and working-age populations, and the need for more young people to sustain communities.  

·        He stressed the plan’s climate change objective, requiring all new homes to produce as much energy as they consume via solar panels and high build standards.  

·        He praised high-quality housing design, referencing the Chepstow Brunel Quarter development as an example.  

·        In terms of concerns relating to traffic impacts, he stated that the Chepstow development did not worsen traffic flows.  

·        He noted the plan’s provision of 50 hectares for economic development to support business growth and employment.  

·        He summarised the strategic objectives as being 50% affordable housing, 100% net zero housing, and sustaining towns and villages.  

·        He advised he was committed to responding to scrutiny and keeping focus on strategic objectives.  

Andrew Jones delivered a presentation and provided an overview of the deposit RLDP consultation report, explaining its purpose to inform the committee about public consultation results and engagement with the community and stakeholders. He outlined the report’s contents: bodies consulted, number of representations, steps taken to publicise and engage, summary of main issues raised, and recommendations on how to address representations.  

Andrew summarised the RLDP’s chronology, including key dates for strategy endorsement and public consultation. He explained that the deposit consultation had received about 950 individual correspondents and approximately 4,500 objections, supports, and comments, highlighting strong community engagement. He advised that responses had included general comments, objections, support and that there had been both concerns and support for the plan’s aspirations. He advised the comments related to the following key consultation themes:  

·        Growth strategy - debate over whether growth is too high or too low 

·        Spatial strategy - concerns about disproportionate growth in the south and reliance on large sites 

·        climate change and net zero - support and concerns about policy links to flood risk and air quality 

·        The challenge of developing on greenfield land.  

Andrew advised there had been concerns about the 50% affordable housing target’s financial viability and questions about local allocation of affordable housing. He stressed that the RLDP is not just a housing plan but also addresses employment, with concerns raised about employment land projections and distribution.  

He summarised recurring site-specific issues: loss  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.